Glass Half Full? Or Half Empty?
All I can conclude is that Roger and I are mediocre communicators. Or terribly unpersuasive. It’s a good thing we’re not prosecuting criminals in court … or car salesmen!
Over the past year in particular we’ve published dozens of posts emphasizing the importance of donor retention. Roger’s even published a book on the subject, Retention Fundraising.
But at least by one measure, we’re not doing good enough.
According to a report by Kivi Leroux Miller, 2015 Nonprofit Communications Trends Report, we’re making only modest progress at best in convincing nonprofits to focus more strongly on what we consider to be the top strategic goal for fundraisers … retaining donors.
Kivi’s report, based on survey responses from 1535 nonprofits, notes that only 30% of nonprofits surveyed selected retention as even a ‘top three’ goal in 2013. At the end of 2014, 53% put retention in the top three, edging ahead of donor acquisition (at 50%) for the first time.
I guess that’s progress. Glass half full.
But still, how discouraging!
Part of the problem is that while 72% of development staff feel “directly responsible” for meeting annual fundraising goals, only 12% of communications directors, and worse, only 67% of executive directors, feel that responsibility. So much for an integrated effort to keep the ship afloat!
And if it’s not meeting an annual fundraising goal, I can’t imagine what those other 28% of development staff think their responsibility actually is … planning the staff retreat?!
When students are tested and fall beneath national or international standards, we of course debate whose ‘fault’ that is — teachers, students, the school environment and resourcing, the home environment.
Who do we blame for the fact that (per this report) half of nonprofits still don’t ‘get’ donor retention? Glass half empty.
I use the term’ blame’ deliberately … because retention rates in the nonprofit sector are criminally low.
Somebody needs to be held to account.
Agitator readers … you be the jury.
Tom
3 responses to “Glass Half Full? Or Half Empty?”
Behavioral Science Q & A
Integrating an individual giving appeal with other communications from a charity can have both positive and negative effects, and the outcome largely depends on how it’s executed. Advantages of Integration Brand Consistency: Maintaining a consistent appearance and messaging across all communications can reinforce the org’s brand identity and strengthen brand recognition and trust among your […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not aware of any in-market tests specifically comparing recurring vs. gift frequency language. I suspect the answer might not be the same with all gift frequencies, nor with all people. It sounds like a great opportunity for you to test and find out what works for your audience. Based on the literature, here’s a couple […]
Read Full Answer
Based on what we know from existing data, those renewal notices can actually be pretty effective in getting people to donate. They tap into our psychology – creating a sense of urgency, reminding us of past support, and using personalization to make the message hit home. They’re playing on our natural tendencies to feel obligated […]
Read Full Answer
Interesting question. I had a quick look at the testing done on this topic. On the positive side, in all cases, over half of donors decide to cover the fee. In some cases, it goes as high as 65%. Not a negligible percentage at all. Here’s another test from iRaiser showing consistent results (see point […]
Read Full Answer
There’s just one thing to consider when designing a supporter journey: the supporter. More specifically, you need to take into account: Who the supporter is i.e. their identity, which is the reason they support this cause, and their personality, which describes the way they “see” and process the world. These will determine the kind of […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not an expert in this but a quick search surfaced this article on the effect of tax reforms on 2019’s charitable giving. The researchers didn’t find a reduction. Actually, they observed an “increase in charitable contributions in 2019, even with the lower tax rates and the dramatically smaller number of taxpayers who itemize their […]
Read Full Answer
Yep, it’s extremely disappointing to continually beat the drum of retention. In our sector, the attrition rate ranges from 60-70%. No one knows it or cares!
Maybe the glass is always full- half liquid, and half air. 53% who value retaining donors, 47% who don’t get it yet. 60-70 % of donors who leave, 30—40% who stay. Non-profit staff and executives who are stale and cling to the status quo, and people like Tom and Roger and other Agitators who are leading the charge for change.
It seems to me there will come a time when the body of knowledge you are advancing will be common practice, and all the creative and vibrant people who focus on retention and donor love years down the road will look back and wonder why it took so long. Then may we all say, “My cup (glass) runneth over”!
Could it be that everyone who crosses the threshold of a nonprofit takes off their “common sense cap?” That’s all that explains this for me. And, sadly, I encounter it in my practice over and over again.
It should be common sense (and it is in the for profit sector) that it costs more to get a new customer than to keep an old one. We know in our own homes that it (usually) costs more to buy a new appliance than to fix an old one (especially when it’s brand new). But… maybe that’s where the problem lies.
We’ve become such a throw-away culture that we think little of tossing away our old donors and replacing them with new ones. In fact, we think so little that we don’t even realize we’re abandoning our current donors. But by acting as if we’re “done” with those folks once the gift is secured, that’s what we’re effectively doing.
And here we come back to common sense (or lack thereof). No one thinks they can sustain bonds with their friends if they talk to them only once a year. Yet we think our donors will keep giving and giving and giving — even if we do very, very little to build a relationship with them.
Let’s put our “common sense caps” on folks!